Essential kit ??

E

esox

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11
Name
Barry
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all, i am new to photography and looking for lots of info :lol::lol: At present i have a Canon 400d with kit lens, a Canon ef28-105 f/4-5.6 lens and a sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG lens. I like landscapes and am trying to get into wildlife and sports pics. The question is what should i buy next ?? loking to spend up to about £200. Thanks Barry.
 
Well a wide angle lens for landscape something like 10-16 and a long lens for wildlife somthing in the region of 400-500mm sadly I don't think you are going to get either with a budget of £200, so I would suggest keep the money and start saving, use the kit you have, having just started you will have plenty of opportunity to improve your shots.

You can shoot wildlife with a 300 lens, but you have to be close, set up a hide or drape some camo over yourself somewhere suitable, bait with some food and then patience which comes free.
 
Spend the money on going out and about and taking pictures.

My 2c worth

Robin...
 
Get a good low light lens, 50mm 1.8 is about £60, save a few quid, get a tripod and a bag
 
you did not say what size kit lens you have.

I would suggest you spend £60 on a Tripod, you could spend more, £100 will get an excellent one. Essential for landscape.
 
will69 said:
I would suggest you spend £60 on a Tripod, you could spend more, £100 will get an excellent one. Essential for landscape.
Click to expand...

I would agree...... Tripod is essential and if you get a red snapper one you might have enough change for a nifty fifty and some filters for some extra creativity.
 
robinb said:
Spend the money on going out and about and taking pictures.

My 2c worth

Robin...
Click to expand...

that and a nifty fifty... and an UWA when it can be afforded/if his photography style demands it. Not everyone needs a 10-20 or a 11-16.
 
If you want to concentrate on landscapes, a circular polariser and some filters can make photos more interesting especially a 10 stop filter.
 
guessing your kit lens is 18-55, if it is this will be fine to start with for landscapes, so i would perhaps use the £200 for landscape gear?
maybe a tripod £60-70 look at redsnapper
Cable release £5-10 ebay
Spirit level hotshoe mount £5 ebay
maybe a cokin p filter starter set £50-70 (will add a magenta cast when stacked, but great to start out with)

with same change left over for a bag, more memory, extra batteries
or petrol to get to a good destination
 
Thanks for all the replys ,was looking at at a nifty fifty but the £60 price put me of can they be any good for that money ???. Also tripods, redsnapper is doing one for about £100 with a ball head which i think i will order. Filters i havent a clue about maybe someone could give me some info as to types and what they do ???. Sorry for all the questions lol, Barry
 
esox said:
Thanks for all the replys ,was looking at at a nifty fifty but the £60 price put me of can they be any good for that money ???.
Click to expand...

you decide.

IMG_8070.jpg


Build quality is why it's so cheap - it's plastic with a plastic mount - but the optical quality makes it a steal.
 
robinb said:
Spend the money on going out and about and taking pictures.

My 2c worth

Robin...
Click to expand...

I agree - if you spend £200 you'll be trading in within months to do it all again. You CAN afford better lenses - you just have to wait and save! It's worth it - good quality glass makes a HUGE difference.
 
esox said:
Thanks for all the replys ,was looking at at a nifty fifty but the £60 price put me of can they be any good for that money ???. Also tripods, redsnapper is doing one for about £100 with a ball head which i think i will order. Filters i havent a clue about maybe someone could give me some info as to types and what they do ???. Sorry for all the questions lol, Barry
Click to expand...

I would start with a circular polariser and a ND grad.

The CPL will cut reflections and give you deeper colour sky etc

The ND grad will reduce the light coming in and increase the time taken to shoot an image giving you milky waterfalls and glassy water etc. You will need a tripod and preferably a remote (or use the timer)
 
if you're starting out and get a 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4 why would you want a tripod!!
 
To take straight pictures, to do long exposures, using MLU, etc.
 
the whole point of a 1.4 lens is to allow pics in dim situations probably hand held - 1.4 lenses and tripods? :cuckoo:
 
Yeeeeeees, but that doesn't mean he won't have use for a tripod, as he specifically listed landscapes, does it? I have an F/1.8 lens, does that mean I'm wrong for desiring a tripod as well???????
 
of course - but . . . why not go try some wonderful 1.8/1.4 available light HH - tripods are for sissies! he he I know - kidding - I have a great one
 
The OP stated he was interested in getting into landscapes and sports, i think the £200 could be spent better elsewhere than on a nifty, for landscapes i go for what i suggested in my last post, sport you would be looking for a fast long lens, ie the 70-200, so will have to save up a bit more £££
 
I think a nifty fifty is essential in any photographers bag....

For the price they are fantastic, even for a quick candid shot of the kids/dog/other half etc etc
 
If you like landscapes then you need a sturdy tripod. I am not sure you abosolutely need a nifty fifty in your bag, however. If you have a need for low light/narrow depth of field then go for it but whilst learning you really probably have plenty of lenses to be getting on with! I have one because I have a child and its bloody good for indoors shots, keeping the shutter speed relatively fast. He just moves too quickly!

So really, get a decent tripod (redsnapper are recommended and I will be getting one soon) and then go out and take photos. Only once you have done that can you work out where your lenses are deficient and then save up accordingly!
 
lenses as they are will be fine, nifty fifty is nice to have and a great bargain, but not essential. Too many people (me included) get hung up on better kit fixing their problems.

tripod is useful for landscapes and static wildlife, I find a monopod better for sports and mobile wildlife, neither strictly essential if you can hold a camera still and don't want to do long exposures.

neutral density (ND) and ND graduated filters, again nice to have, not strictly essential. Its hard to get some of the landscape shots looking good without ND Graduated filters, especially bright cloudy skies. Full NDs are best combined with a tripod for long exposures, particularly if you want to get the milky waterfall or seaside shots.
Circular polarising filter again useful, not strictly essential but can improve skies again.


truly essential kit:
removeable hard drive for backups
good monitor (preferably with proper calibration)
spare camera battery
spare CF card
training courses / club membership / magazine subscriptions / library card / lots of critical examination of results.
inspiration & practice


just my thoughts, hope they help
 
I have the same Sigma lens all be it mine has the Macro mode I find it to be quite good for wildlife shots. I have only used it once for sport and it was good at that as well. I would recommend that you get a second battery and maybe a second memory card.
 
Hmm,

The superb advice above may have you confused!

As a landscape phtographer - for a hobby I might add - I'm afraid you won't get anywhere unless you buy a GOOD tripod. That is the most important product to start with.

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-manfrotto-190x-pro-b-tripod.htm

Don't buy a cheap 7 day shop or high street named one. You need a proper tripod with a proper, preferably geared head.

http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-manfrotto-410-junior-geared-head.htm

I'm not saying these are the best products, but they give you an idea of what you need to look for.

Couple this to a level which clips onto the flash mount and you can get a cheap remote control.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hama-5411-Camera-Spirit-Level/dp/B00005QFAF

The idea of the tripod is of course no movement so you need the remote control so you take the pic without touching the camera.

As a matter of interest last year I was on a photographic holiday and two of the other guests had cheap tripods and swore by them. I think one was a National Geographic, probably free when they subscribed!

That evening when our pictures were put on the 60 inch lcd hd TV for critique and photshop work, both owners bought a new tripod there and then!

Take a look in the 'for sale' section there is normally lots on there.

Regards

Chris
 
awp said:
the whole point of a 1.4 lens is to allow pics in dim situations probably hand held - 1.4 lenses and tripods? :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Plus the reduced depth of field at large apertures.
 
Lies. You don't *need* a tripod unless you plan on shooting in dim light a lot. In fact, you have a camera and a lens and that's all you need for now. Wanna shoot sports and wildlife? Maybe spend £60 on that 50mm lens and shoot a bit of little-league stuff you can get up close to, not like you as a beginner are going to be sidelining at full-size football matches.

Spend the rest of your money on petrol (to get you to those lovely landscape locations) and zoo tickets. Buy too much gear now and you'll end up selling it later.
 
mustanir said:
Lies. You don't *need* a tripod unless you plan on shooting in dim light a lot.
Click to expand...

Wow!

That is a nasty way of reacting to advice given to a fellow photographer!

Notwithstanding the fact that you obviously have very little knowledge of taking higher quality landscape pictures. I am very much a novice but it was the first thing I found out and as mentioned actually saw proved.

Perhaps you better contact all of our well known and famous landscape photographers who do use tripods and tell them they have been getting it wrong.

In fact I guess I have it wrong, you might even be able to make some money giving lectures as you are obviously a very skilled and gifted photographer.

Regards

Chris
 
:plusone: for tri-pod.

A decent tri-pod is for life, not to say the OP has to use it all the time and spend a fortune. But certainly for the type of photography i.e. landscape it will be useful. 50mm lenses are of course affordable and a must have in my opinion. Though I suggest is learn with the lenses he has now i.e. understand the sweet spots in the focal length/aperture and more importantly their limitations.

With the remaining change the OP can start picking up other stuff like cable release, spare batts, filters etc.

Personally don't think tri-pod is just used in dim light, certainly need one during long exposures - 'flowing blurry' water pics anyone? Macro photography of flowers and bugs (if you can call them wildlife), and perhaps the odd self portrait :)
 
I said you don't *need* a tripod. A tripod is no good to you as a landscape shooter if you are cooped up at home. There are times a tripod is useful, but there really is no need for one in many cases. Landscapes are often (but not always) shot at the wider focal lengths, where handholding is perfectly doable up to relatively slow speeds. Coupled with the fact that you don't get much brighter ambient light than daylight outdoors (even on an overcast day), if you are still incapable of handholding a camera and taking a decent photo, you need lessons in camera handling.

I have a tripod and I swear by it when the times come that I need it. For a beginner who is still finding his feet and is just trying stuff, I see no need to fret about gear at all. And a tripod is still not an essential item. Not now.
 
mustanir, quite alot of landscape photographers do HDR and exposure blending, if you can hand hold 3 shots in exactly the same place I'm happy for you. But for me a tripod is a must!
 
Hi Mustanir,

Personally I know very few landscape photographers who don't use a tripod!

Whether you can hand hold a camera or not. Like the mirror up which has been taught to me by one of the leading landscape photographers in the country it is an essential part of getting the best shot you can possible manage.

Fortunately entry into this magical world can be relatively low cost if you can manage the weight.

If on the other hand you want to take holiday snapshots then not using a tripod is fine. It is only when you want to move on to the next level that a tripod becomes a necessity.

Regards

Chris
 
Well I've taken a lot of published landscape pictures without a tripod - although I own (and use sometimes) one of the best available.
 
awp said:
Well I've taken a lot of published landscape pictures without a tripod - although I own (and use sometimes) one of the best available.
Click to expand...

There's one!
 
G2EWS said:
It is only when you want to move on to the next level that a tripod becomes a necessity.
Click to expand...

Well done, that is exactly the point I am making. Context is everything. Wasn't this thread supposed to be advice for a relative beginner on what his spending priority should be given a £200 budget?
 
If you're serious about needing a tripod you need to be serious about your budget too! :) Which means a lot more than 200!
 
awp said:
If you're serious about needing a tripod you need to be serious about your budget too! :) Which means a lot more than 200!
Click to expand...

200 will get you frotto 055 legs and a reasonable head (good enough for his weight kit but not long term)

choose wisely on heads I wish I had gotten a different one and dislike mine :(
 
The geared head I gave a link to is one of the better low cost heads favoured by landscape photographers as you can move through each of the three planes with ease.

Regards

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top